Bilateral vs Multilateral Cricket: How Scheduling Shapes the Sport
The difference between bilateral cricket (two nations playing each other) and multilateral cricket (ICC tournaments, tri-series, multi-team events) — why bilateral cricket dominates the calendar, how much the ICC's multilateral events drive revenue vs. prestige, the Future Tours Programme (FTP), and the growing conflict between bilateral deals and ICC tournament scheduling.
The Bilateral Dominance
The vast majority of international cricket played in any given year is bilateral — two nations playing a series of Tests, ODIs, and T20Is against each other. Bilateral cricket is organised by the home board (which retains the broadcast revenue from its own home matches), making it the primary financial engine of most cricket boards. India's bilateral schedule is the most commercially valuable in world cricket: BCCI broadcast deals for home bilateral series (India hosting Australia, England, Pakistan in different years) generate hundreds of millions of dollars in broadcast rights.
The Future Tours Programme (FTP) is the ICC's framework that schedules bilateral cricket across all full-member nations over a 4-year cycle. The FTP allocates home-and-away series between all combinations of the 12 Full Members, with the top nations (India, England, Australia) having more series than smaller boards because their matches generate higher commercial value. The FTP is negotiated by the ICC but implemented by bilateral agreement between the boards — the ICC enforces compliance but the commercial terms of each series are set independently.
ICC Multilateral Events: Prestige Over Volume
ICC multilateral events — the World Test Championship, ODI World Cup, T20 World Cup, and Champions Trophy — represent a small fraction of total international match days but a disproportionate fraction of cricket's global prestige and media profile. The T20 World Cup (played every 2 years) and the ODI World Cup (every 4 years) are consistently the most-viewed cricket events globally — the 2023 ODI World Cup in India generated record viewership. Despite this, ICC events generate revenue primarily through centralised broadcast rights and sponsorships, with proceeds distributed back to member boards — a fundamentally different revenue model from bilateral cricket.
The tension between bilateral and multilateral scheduling manifests most acutely when ICC events require top players to leave home during lucrative bilateral series. Boards have sometimes negotiated the FTP to minimise bilateral series disruption from ICC events — protecting their most profitable home series dates. The ICC's authority to schedule multilateral events is exercised in coordination with the FTP to avoid direct conflict, but the competition for prime calendar windows is an ongoing negotiation.
The Big Three's Influence
India, England, and Australia — the 'Big Three' of cricket governance — exercise disproportionate influence over ICC scheduling decisions because they collectively generate approximately 70-80% of global cricket's commercial revenue. The 2014 ICC governance restructure formally acknowledged this power concentration by giving the Big Three enhanced revenue distributions and governance influence. Smaller boards (West Indies, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Zimbabwe, Bangladesh, Ireland, Afghanistan) have argued that this concentration reduces their development opportunities and limits their commercial growth.
Frequently asked questions
Who decides the Future Tours Programme?
The FTP is negotiated and agreed by the ICC's Chief Executives' Committee — the CEOs of all Full Member boards. The ICC facilitates the scheduling process and enforces compliance, but the specific bilateral arrangements (dates, venue, series length) within the FTP framework are agreed between each pair of boards. The FTP is revised every 4 years and is subject to ongoing modification as commercial deals change and board priorities shift. ICC events are hardcoded into the FTP framework with protected windows.
Does India's bilateral schedule with Pakistan affect ICC tournament scheduling?
India and Pakistan have not played bilateral cricket since 2012-13 due to political tensions between the two governments. They only meet in ICC multilateral events (World Cups, Champions Trophy, Asia Cup) — matches that are consistently the most-viewed individual cricket fixtures globally. The ICC cannot force bilateral India-Pakistan cricket, as international sports events between nations require government permission. The India-Pakistan ICC match dynamic has been a significant argument for the continued value of multilateral ICC events that force these nations to play each other.
How does the WTC (World Test Championship) work as a multilateral event?
The WTC is structured as a two-year rolling competition where every bilateral Test series generates WTC points for both teams (16 points for a win, 8 for a draw, 0 for a loss). At the end of the two-year cycle, the top two teams on a Points Championship Table (PCT) — which normalises points by the number of matches played — contest a WTC Final. The WTC Final is the closest thing to a 'Test World Cup' — played in a neutral venue (typically England) between the top two ranked teams. India, Australia, and New Zealand have contested WTC Finals in the two completed cycles (2019-21 and 2021-23).